Menu

In Defense of Citizens United

The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold free speech met a vicious backlash from the left. But the liberals’ arguments are only half-baked, as you’re about to see.

Few Supreme Court decisions have been as controversial in recent years as the Citizens United case. For those of you who don’t know, Citizens United v. Federal Electoral Commission (that’s its full title) originated as a dispute between some movie-makers (Citizens United) and the FEC over some basic freedom of speech rights. The FEC said that Citizens United couldn’t release a film critiquing then-Senator Hillary Clinton because the release date conflicted with a law called McCain-Feingold. The law, sponsored by John McCain and Russ Feingold, prohibited corporations from creating political ads for elections less than 60 days away. Citizens United said that was unfair, because the first amendment protects their right to produce films and documentaries like the one they proposed, regardless of whether or not they painted a politician in a positive light.

The court sided with Citizens United. By a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court found that corporations, like people, are protected under the first amendment. As corporations tend to support pro-job, pro-business candidates (that is, Republicans), many liberals lost it. Afraid that corporations would give Republicans a financial edge, many Democrats tried to paint the decision as one which “sold elections” to wealthy companies, who could use their deep pockets to fund Super PACs, entities that can campaign for a candidate without coordinating with him (Obama later flip-flopped on the issue and now has his own Super PAC, by the way). A typical reaction to the Citizens United decision was this one, seen by high school government classes around the country to “educate” unsuspecting students about current events:

Seems pretty well put together, doesn’t it? Those corporations are big, nasty enterprises, aren’t they? Look at them, buying elections like that! We need to put the people back in charge! Right?!

Actually, no. We don’t need to put the people back in charge of the voting process because they’re already in charge! Also, so much for fairness and unbiased teaching. The video you just watched absolutely bludgeons corporations and moneymaking entities to death without any consideration of the argument that actually won in front of the Supreme Court! Fortunately, people like Lee Doren still have some respect for the facts. Mr. Doren’s response to the propaganda video above does a beautiful job of dismantling it for you, in a way far more succinct and effective than I could manage:

(Click here if you’re having trouble viewing it to watch it on YouTube)

Pretty convincing rebuttal, if you ask me. Mr. Doren has some really great content on YouTube, by the way. His channel, HowTheWorldWorks, has over 40,000 subscribers and 7.4 million video views. But I digress. The main point here is simple. Corporations are made up of people, and people have rights. Don’t let anyone ever tell you otherwise. Citizens United opened up the political process for many groups of people who otherwise would have been shut out, and given more protection to the rights of all in America. Instead of attacking people with misleading propaganda, we should applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to defend our freedoms from a tyrannical majority at a time when no one else in Washington would dare to do the same.

9 comments on “In Defense of Citizens United”

I think the most economical thing to do would be to repeal McCain-Feingold considering it abridged the freedom of speech so clearly given in the first amendment. I believe the Supreme Court made the correct decision and verdict concerning the Citizens United case. Corporations are in fact people, every product or service has a person at its foundation. The iPhone had Steve Jobs, the airplane had the Wright Bros. Etc. I have never witnessed such a large group of disingenuous and down right evil people who are willing to put party before country, I keep wondering to my self; when liberal progressives are done raping this country of its freedoms; where will they go, where will they live? After all they may be immune from the insanity of social – Marxist – communism for a season, but at some point they will find themselves in the minority again and then what?

That was a pretty insightful comment. I like the part about repealing McCain-Feingold, or at least a good chunk of it. In response to your remarks on liberals I would say, in my experience, there are two kinds. Many liberals are merely misguided in their thinking, but a few are purposefully radical. Such people do want an end to the American system, a kleptocracy with themselves on top. I’m talking Marxist-Leninists mostly. As to where they’ll go or what they’ll do if they succeed, I’d say we can’t afford to find out.

There is a bitter irony in the argument pro-commie or anti-commie, the same people who get all worked up over “coercion” when it comes to (just for discussions sake) the display of the ten commandments in a courtroom or classroom, or say a Cross displayed on public property. But in contrast, they are more than willing to spend their substance and break their legs to coerce and force their Communist drivel on a people that clearly do NOT want to be like Europe! I say stop trying to change America into a place that already exists. All they have to do is move to a Communist country, and they don’t have to protest anymore. Man; I fixed that problem. Were being overrun by “useful idiots”.

There does seem to be this line of reasoning that says “If Europe’s doing it, we should do it.” I think that’s a very poor train of thought, because Europe is a total mess. Look at Greece. Look at Portugal. Look at Ireland. Every place that’s developed a large welfare system is facing massive debt issues. Look at the USSR. Look at Cuba. Everywhere that’s tried pure Marxism has suffered enormously for no gain. Only in instances where a country has “liberalized” (don’t confuse my meaning!) its economy – for example, China, who is transitioning to a free market – can we find signs of success and improvement.

Let me preface this comment with: I am truly not being mean when I say, the misguided liberal is lazy in my estimation, because it is really easy to “just take the media’s word for it, or just take Hollywood’s word for it” and lock step right into a prepared narrative. But to be conservative, means you have or are dedicating your time and resources into educating yourself on American History, Law, searching for truth, (no matter where it takes you) and studying political sciences. It really is easy to be a liberal, as Rush says “It really is the most gutless decision one can make”.

I couldn’t agree more! Granted, we have lazy Republicans too, but they’re not truly conservative in my estimation because true conservatives believe in hard work and deep thought. That’s a very keen observation! In fact, I’d never thought of a distinction between the two extremes in those terms before. I may just write a post about it! You’ll get credit for the inspiration of course, if I do indeed write one. Very excellent point!

I agree, lazy Republicans are not conservative, they are RINO liberals! It takes no thought or courage to go to Washington D.C. and sell your soul, and sell out your constituents. Happy blogging on the idea I inspired, I consider it an honor.